replacing engines

Other
Tutor: None Selected Time limit: 3 Days

Is it possible to take a v6 3.0 engine out of a dodge caravan and put in a 4 cylinder 2.4 engine out of Plymouth voyager 

Sep 30th, 2013
The two bench seats in the rear were independently removable, and the large three-seat bench could also be installed in the 2nd row location via a second set of attachment points on the van's floor, ordinarily hidden with snap-in plastic covers. This configuration allowed for conventional five-passenger seating with a sizable cargo area in the rear. The latching mechanisms for the benches were very intuitive and easy to operate.
On base models, the front buckets were low-back items, upholstered with plain cloth or vinyl. On SEs, the buyer could choose between low-back buckets with deluxe cloth or high-back buckets in upgraded vinyl. LEs came standard with high-back front buckets, upholstered in either luxury cloth or luxury vinyl.
In 1985 and 1986, there was also a five-passenger version with a back seat that could be folded flat with the pull of a handle into a bed that filled the rear compartment from the back of the front seats to the rear. This option was known as the Magic Camper. The Magic Camper back seat had an extra rear-facing cushion that formed the back-most section of the bed when folded flat and the seat, though very heavy, was removable. The Magic Camper option included a tent that attached magnetically to the side of the vehicle allowing access in and out of the sliding side door.

Third generation Voyagers introduced a new system of rear seats to simplify installation, removal, and re-positioning— marketed as "Easy-Out Roller Seats". All Voyagers and Grand Voyagers were equipped with this feature. When installed, the 2nd and 3rd row seats (either bucket or bench seats) were latched to floor-mounted strikers. When unlatched, eight rollers lifted each seat, allowing it to be rolled fore and aft. Tracks had locator depressions for rollers, thus enabling simple installation. Ergonomic levers at the seatbacks released the floor latches single handedly without tools and raised the seats onto the rollers in a single motion. Additionally, seatbacks were designed to fold forward. Seat roller tracks were permanently attached to the floor and seat stanchions were aligned, fascillitating the longitiudinal rolling of the seats. Bench seat stanchions were moved inboard to reduce bending stress in the seat frames, allowing them to be lighter.
When configured as two and three person benches (available through Generation IV), the Easy Out Roller Seats could be unwieldy. Beginning in 2001, second and third row seats became available in a 'quad' configuration — bucket or captain chairs in the second row and a third row three-person 50/50 split "bench" — with each section weighing under 50 lb (23 kg). The Easy-out system remained in use through Generation V — where certain models featured a two-person bench and the under-floor compartments from the Stow'n Go system.
Sep 30th, 2013

I was asking about the engines, not the seats. I need to know if I can take out the v6 engine and put in the 4 cylinder engine.

Sep 30th, 2013

yes

CR’s assessment is that four-pot engines have to work much harder than a V6 to move a large vehicle like the Sorento. The four-banger might be more inherently efficient, but in practice it has to be used far less efficiently to maintain good progress. Its lower gearing further reduces its efficiency advantages. And though nearly $6k to upgrade to the V6 is a steep jump, it seems that in the case of the Sorento at least, it’s worth stretching for. After all, who would rather have 22 lbs per horsepower instead of 15 lbs per horsepower if there’s no efficiency bonus?

But here’s where things get psychological: if you have the V6′s grunt will you be tempted to drive more… enthusiastically? After all, with “adequate” four-cylinder power, chances are that you’ll be lulled into a more sedate pace compared to a V6. With more power, the temptation to drive faster and therefore less efficiently has to be part of the equation… and it’s one that will never show up on an EPA test.

4-cylinder is the best if you know that you are not travelling at top speed everyday. The stability in V6 is when u are travelling at a high speed. If u spend most of ur time in town where the maximum speed is below 100km/hr the 4cylinder is the ideal choice. 
maintenance is cheap
fuel consumption is better
parts are cheaper
and there is no prove that v6 engine last longer than 4 cylinder engines.

Sep 30th, 2013

Did you know? You can earn $20 for every friend you invite to Studypool!
Click here to
Refer a Friend
...
Sep 30th, 2013
...
Sep 30th, 2013
Feb 25th, 2017
check_circle
Mark as Final Answer
check_circle
Unmark as Final Answer
check_circle
Final Answer

Secure Information

Content will be erased after question is completed.

check_circle
Final Answer